On Tue, 27 Nov 2018 12:03:35 +0100, Mikael Abrahamsson said:
> I'd really like to see a wider audience weigh in on the pro:s and con:s of
> this approach. Do parents really want to come home to their 12 year old
> who might have opened up their residential gateway and installed something
> the 12 year old downloaded from the Internet? Perhaps yes, perhaps no.

That's a parenting problem not easily solved via technology. In particular, there's
the issue that often, the 12 year old is more clever than the parent - or the person
who designed the parental controls on the device.

On Tue, 27 Nov 2018 13:17:57 +0200, Jonathan Morton said:
> Currently, the easiest way to build a machine that's *truly* secure is to
> take something like a 6502 (which is still being manufactured by WDC) and
> associated 74AHC-series logic chips, SRAMs and EEPROMs, a 4-layer PCBs, all of
> which are built on crude enough technology to be physically examined for
> backdoor devices in an airport-grade X-ray machine if necessary.  Then write
> the necessary software in assembly, which can be translated to machine code (or
> at least verified) by hand if you're truly paranoid, and toggle it in byte by
>byte on the front panel.

> Good luck getting a web browser running on one of those, though.

Couldn't find a browser, but somebody cooked up an ethernet based webserver for a 6502..

https://developers.slashdot.org/story/03/08/16/1226253/a-tcpip-stack-and-web-server-in-basic